Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The development of summary components for the Disablement in the Physically Active scale in collegiate athletes

  • Brief Communication
  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The Disablement in the Physically Active scale (DPA) is a generic patient-reported outcome designed to evaluate constructs of disability in physically active populations. The purpose of this study was to analyze the DPA scale structure for summary components.

Methods

Four hundred and fifty-six collegiate athletes completed a demographic form and the DPA. A principal component analysis (PCA) was conducted with oblique rotation. Factors with eigenvalues >1 that explained >5 % of the variance were retained.

Results

The PCA revealed a two-factor structure consistent with paradigms used to develop the original DPA. Items 1–12 loaded on Factors 1 and Items 13–16 loaded on Factor 2. Items 1–12 pertain to impairment, activity limitations, and participation restrictions. Items 13–16 address psychosocial and emotional well-being. Consideration of item content suggested Factor 1 concerned physical function, while Factor 2 concerned mental well-being. Thus, items clustered around Factor 1 and 2 were identified as physical (DPA–PSC) and mental (DPA–MSC) summary components, respectively. Together, the factors accounted for 65.1 % of the variance.

Conclusions

The PCA revealed a two-factor structure for the DPA that resulted in DPA–PSC and DPA–MSC. Analyzing the DPA as separate constructs may provide distinct information that could help to prescribe treatment and rehabilitation strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Parsons, J. T., & Snyder, A. R. (2011). Health-related quality of life as a primary clinical outcome in sport rehabilitation. Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, 20(1), 17–36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Snyder, A. R., Parsons, J. T., Valovich McLeod, T. C., Curtis Bay, R., Michener, L. A., & Sauers, E. L. (2008). Using disablement models and clinical outcomes assessment to enable evidence-based athletic training practice, part I: Disablement models. Journal of Athletic Training, 43(4), 428–436.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M., Gray, J. A., Haynes, R. B., & Richardson, W. S. (1996). Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t. BMJ, 312(7023), 71–72.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Vela, L. I., & Denegar, C. (2010). Transient disablement in the physically active with musculoskeletal injuries, part I: A descriptive model. Journal of Athletic Training, 45(6), 615–629.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Vela, L. I., & Denegar, C. R. (2010). The disablement in the physically active scale, part II: The psychometric properties of an outcomes scale for musculoskeletal injuries. Journal of Athletic Training, 45(6), 630–641.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Streiner, D. L., & Norman, G. R. (2008). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Kline, P. (1993). The handbook of psychological testing. London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ferketich, S. (1991). Focus on psychometrics: Aspects of item analysis. Research in Nursing and Health, 14(2), 165–168.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Huffman, G. R., Park, J., Roser-Jones, C., Sennett, B. J., Yagnik, G., & Webner, D. (2008). Normative SF-36 values in competing NCAA intercollegiate athletes differ from values in the general population. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American, 90(3), 471–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. McAllister, D. R., Motamedi, A. R., Hame, S. L., Shapiro, M. S., & Dorey, F. J. (2001). Quality of life assessment in elite collegiate athletes. American Journal of Sports Medicine, 29(6), 806–810.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The investigators would like to acknowledge and thank Stefani Masterton, MSEd, ATC and Nicole Emanato, MS, ATC, as well as, the other athletic trainers for their efforts in facilitating and organizing data collection sessions for this investigation.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Interdisciplinary Health Sciences, A.T. Still University, Mesa, AZ, USA

    Megan N. Houston

  2. School of Physical Therapy & Athletic Training, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA

    Johanna M. Hoch, Bonnie L. Van Lunen & Matthew C. Hoch

Authors
  1. Megan N. Houston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Johanna M. Hoch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bonnie L. Van Lunen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Matthew C. Hoch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Megan N. Houston.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Houston, M.N., Hoch, J.M., Van Lunen, B.L. et al. The development of summary components for the Disablement in the Physically Active scale in collegiate athletes. Qual Life Res 24, 2657–2662 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1007-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1007-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation